Talk:Mega Man X6

Mega Man X6 has been listed as one of the Video games good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: June 3, 2024. (Reviewed version).

Video games Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

List of Minecraft characters (4 participants)
Carlton Wilborn (4 participants)
Cossacks (video games series) (2 participants)
Rat Race (video game) (7 participants)
Red Barrels (3 participants)
TheoTown (12 participants; relisted)
Old Grandma Hardcore (6 participants; relisted)
Zero Hour (video game) (6 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Metal Shark Prayer?

"L" and "R" sounds are written with identical symbols in japanese, so the name could easily be a fan-based mistranslation. Unless there is a source sighted that "Prayer" was an official romanization in Japan at some point, of which I am aware of none, I believe this bit should be deleted. 71.185.116.189 22:24, 21 September 2007 (UTC)Hypershell[reply]

Criticism (level design)

Claiming the level design as subpar is a subjective statement, there are others who appreciate the high difficulty. One could just as easily argue, that the fact that the so-called "impossible" situations carry multiple solutions taking advantage of subtle mechanics indicates a high attention to detail in their design. Therefore, the claim of subpar design has been removed. Also, it was added, another possible recourse while stuck is to use the Start/Select command to return to the title screen, then select the Load Previous Data option, rather than killing yourself. Counter-point as to how this aspect is interpreted by fans was also added, for the sake of balance. Though it is a frequent criticism, it is not an objective flaw. 71.185.116.189 22:24, 21 September 2007 (UTC)Hypershell[reply]

Criticism (story)

A gross error was made here in that Zero never goes into hibernation in X5. He is blown up, shot, and left for dead. Though interviews with Keiji Inafune indicate that the concepts for MegaMan Zero started before X6 did (meaning Zero would have been revived anyway, the question is when), X6 was released first, and it is an incorrect fan-based assumption that the finished MegaMan Zero ignores X6, it does not. The fact that Zero's name is on the door in MegaMan Zero's opening, in addition to the fact that he is protected by a force field, says that he was intentionally sealed and not left for dead as X5 depicts.

The one error X6 does make, in relation to story, regards only timeframe. X6 is 3 weeks from X5 (some argue 4 weeks, 3 weeks pertaining to Gate locating a piece of Zero, but this is not specifically stated in-game), which retcons X's X5 ending, which stated that he fought alone with the Z-Saber for at least 3 years. This bit was moved to criticism and removed from Trivia, since it's needlessly redundant. Info on the misconceptions around X6's place in the storyline was added to Trivia 71.185.116.189 22:24, 21 September 2007 (UTC)Hypershell[reply]

Cleanup needed on the "Differences from the previous games"

It seems really biased and unecessary. If someone could summarize it and keep it neutral, that would be nice, or get rid of it all together. Exo Kopaka (talk) 12:20, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. You may want to look it over, since this kind of stuff is outside my expertise, but I can think of no other way to salvage this section. You may want to scoot it to Gameplay. Larrythefunkyferret (talk) 08:25, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mega Man X6. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:10, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Mega Man X6/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Tintor2 (talk · contribs) 20:09, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Pokelego999 (talk · contribs) 00:58, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Will take this on in the coming days. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 00:58, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Tintor2 (talk · contribs)

Six GA Criteria

1. Article is well-written.

2. No OR, all info is cited in the article.

3. Coverage is broad in depth and focus. Shows multiple aspects of the game.

4. Article appears neutral, and does not appear to hold a significantly negative nor positive stance on the subject.

5. Article appears stable. Does not appear to have had any major vandalism occur.

6. Article uses two fair use images with proper rationale.

Lead

-Looks good

Gameplay

-Looks good

Plot

-While not necessary for this GAN, I'd suggest trying to find sources to verify plot info, especially beyond quotes. Not a requirement, of course, and it is satisfactory as it is now.

- Added some pages from the official manual.

Development

-Given the large amount of information discussing Gate's design in association with the Mavericks, I feel an additional image may be worthwhile here to help aid the reader in visually understanding this, though I am uncertain what image would best apply here. Otherwise, section looks good.

- Added a picture of all the bosses with commentary from the artist.

Reception

-"Gaming Age found the game challenging to the point players would need to complete it in order to finish." ...That's how a game works? I assume this can be elaborated on in a more significant extent but right now it's worded very bluntly and isn't overall helpful to the article's Reception.

- Revised.

-"and felt the difficulty was higher than previous installments, despite boss designs lacking the appeal to make the player care." I'd reword here since "despite" implies these two things contradict each other despite both inherently being negatives for the game.

- Revised

Overall

-I apologize that this took so long to get done, so I hope I haven't caused any inconvenience with my tardiness. The article looks pretty solid overall. Just patch up a few tidbits and this should be good to go. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 21:48, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Pokelego999: No problem. Revised everything you mentioned.Tintor2 (talk) 22:16, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Tintor2 looks good. Happy to pass! Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 12:42, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]